09-13-2011, 06:45 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1315838884' post='11522']
Well, if you scale down to 16mp you will have the same quality as in the native sensor. However, you've gained the potential of a little more resolution which is not available to the 16mp sensor.
...
[/quote]
I agree, but -lets say- only for a certain print size for both alternatives... But people "want" 100% pixel peeping... And on that race, I don't think 24mp can beat the performance of 16mp (given that they use same electronics and software)...
State-of-the-art sensor with not so much pixel density + (more importantly maybe) a better body in terms of other photographic functionalities... I believe various improvement areas are more or less ignored compared to the MP obsession. I'm not against that the resolution goes higher in time, but I'm against that the MP race gets more attention of producers than other criterias.
Serkan
Well, if you scale down to 16mp you will have the same quality as in the native sensor. However, you've gained the potential of a little more resolution which is not available to the 16mp sensor.
...
[/quote]
I agree, but -lets say- only for a certain print size for both alternatives... But people "want" 100% pixel peeping... And on that race, I don't think 24mp can beat the performance of 16mp (given that they use same electronics and software)...
Quote:Anyway, the mega-pixel race continues to be non-sense from my perspective. Frankly I would opt for a state-of-the-art 10mp APS-C sensor.
State-of-the-art sensor with not so much pixel density + (more importantly maybe) a better body in terms of other photographic functionalities... I believe various improvement areas are more or less ignored compared to the MP obsession. I'm not against that the resolution goes higher in time, but I'm against that the MP race gets more attention of producers than other criterias.
Serkan